I did a little test, not very scientific (or straight) but hopefully enough to know.
The Vespid on the S5 (5.9k B-Raw, 8:1) vs the GH5s (C4k Q3), same capture settings (wide open, ISO 800), some base grade (4800 white balance, no tint, no exposure adjustment, then an equaliser).
The Vespid, with mild soap bubble Bokeh and a cool tint. Lovely look as expected, the Bokeh a little Ni-sen or cross-eyed and CA is obvious.
Apart from the slight framing miss and the C4k width, the full frame depth of field difference is obvious* taking away from the file by comparison and the exposure looks brighter and very warm, which is not the camera as the GH5s runs cool-magenta. No breathing or CA, but focus was slightly harder to acquire, likely down to the brighter exposure and difference in framing.
No way of comparing Bokeh here as the DOF is too different thanks to the difference in formats, but there is a difference. The Hope looks “safe” overall, maybe even boringly so, the Vespid is a little more edgy, a bit more opinionated.
The CA on the Vespid file has robbed it of some fine detail rendering, even with more actual resolution.
What this would mean though is, if I were to get a Vespid wide for the full frame, I would have less DOF than the same settings on an MFT with the Vision 12mm.
The Vespid again. Smooth and natural looking, basically no focus breathing noticed.
The Hope, a little over exposed, so it lets in some more light? No focus breathing either. The Vespid was easier to focus, but shallower depth of field helps there. I actually really like the faux T4 (MFT T2.1) depth on this one, more coherent, natural and more of a story teller.
Hope on the left again, but I did balance the shot a little this time. No point in poor exposure matching (either way) skewing the results. The advantage of MFT depth of field is evident here, holding more foreground detail.
Ok, the question may be answered. The Hope looks to be as sharp or sharper wide open with no CA, the Vespid has a feeling of CA fuzziness, the difference in cameras and formats having more to do with the difference in look.
The Hope is brighter, slightly snappier wide open with no CA and warmer by a mile as it goes (both camera sensors lean cool).
As they came out, I preferred the Vespid file, but several things are at play;
The shallower depth always looks more “cinematic” and grown up.
The warmer and slightly brighter Hope file will by it’s very nature look less deep and punchy, softer even (white balance is sooo important here).
Things were not perfectly aligned as the lenses were different actual focal lengths and I was no scientist here.
I processed and exposed for the first camera, the S5 and Vespid, so it got the best of everything, although I did try to be fair and base-line my settings (even ignoring the difference in false colour).
The Hope file was actually cropped more from a smaller base file (not by much, but enough), so I was not totally fair here either, but the respective cameras gave me few other options as the S5 only does full frame RAW in 5.9k and the GH5s in C4k.
The Hope is known for better flare, CA, distortion and vignetting control, the Vespid for it’s unique look, all of which I am seeing here.
Maybe another test comparing the Vespid to the Hope 50 on the same camera, as my MFT mount arrived during the test. This may be a bit of a waste, but I picked one up cheap, so again, I let fate guide my hand. The Vespid butchers bill is now about square, but two adapters for one.
My feelings from here are a little confused.
If I were to get the 25mm Vespid Mk1, what would be accomplished other than a wide angle for the full frames with shallow depth of field and a decent, but probably unnecessary, new standard for the MFT cams? It is different to the Hopes and similar to the 40mm, so a dual win there.
If I went with the Mk2 24mm, would I get a noticeably better lens than the Hope and if so, what role would either then play? A replacement MFT standard or again a wide for the S5, but do I really need that? Matching the two Vespid series might be as difficult as matching the Hope to the Vespid.
A lens that could be a 40mm in 4k RAW with a forced APS-c crop on the S5 maybe (back to the 25mm)? Cheaper to just use what I have in 6k and ditch the masters after processing down or use one of the 35’s I have at hand.
The biggest question is, what role does the Vespid play? It is gorgeous, but so are many of my other options. With two adapters I have a one lens-multiple cameras kit, which is a bit backwards, but guarantees a similar look.
The 25mm is floating to the top because it is a different look to the Hope, flawed where the Hope is stronger, it is cheaper, it matches the 40mm and is suffering from a serious case of better being the enemy of good, even great. I like the 40 for it’s look, but was then surprised by its quality, so the 25 would undoubtedly provide the same.
I had hoped to find either a clear difference on looks or quality and found the former, the one I wanted to find. The Mk1 Vespids are still excellent and beautiful in their own way, the Hopes are clean and safe. Perfect.
Now, can I justify effectively three cine series for each format, even if one if shared?
*The two lenses are similar in magnification for their respective formats, but the full frame lens is almost twice as long by actual focal length. Also, I messed up the framing slightly, pushing the 25mm back a little too much.